Perhaps it’s easiest this way – the movement of spacetime can be measured theoretically at a certain “rate” from our perspective, but it doesn’t mean the object is moving, simply that the space around it is being expanded – in terms of one object “moving,” think of a table with a dinner plate on a tablecloth. If the tablecloth is space, it might be conceived of as pulling the tablecloth from under the plate until it’s on a different place on the tablecloth. The plate didn’t move, but it’s in a different place.
Now, put dots on the tablecloth. These are the galaxies. Imagine the cloth is super-stretchy, have people at it’s four corners, and start pulling. The space in between the dots will increase, but the dots (galaxies) don’t really move. Because this isn’t movement as we conceive of it in a normal physical sense, the four people can pull the tablecloth as fast as they want without being limited by the speed of light. From the perspective of the dot or galaxy, things are moving away from it at something faster than the speed of light – but they aren’t moving, the spacetime between them is expanding.
I don’t pretend to know how this works (and I don’t think that the nobel-prize winning physicists do either ;-)). But conceived of in this manner, the objects aren’t moving at all, and therefore from the object’s perspective it’s not going back in time at all. However, looking at any other object, interesting idea – time “travels” at the speed of light, so for an object viewed at one point and then again later, where spacetime between it has expanded, you could argue that the object viewed later would have to be the object as it was at an earlier time as that light would have traveled a greater distance.
But that doesn’t seem to be how it works, as we observe the expanding universe…and if this were the case it would seem that the universe were contracting. I think that it probably works out due to something about the wave/particle duality of the photon and the relative nature of the speed of light to itself, and light from its own perspective…but as @Austinlad
says…who knows. ;-)